Hitler's Reichstag Speech of December 11, 1941: Germany's Declaration of War Against the US

[Joe McCarthy]

Today is the 69th anniversary of Hitler's speech before the Reichstag declaring war on the United States. This often ignored speech can be read in its entirety here:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v08/v08p389_Hitler.html

I may post some extracts as we proceed.

[Joe McCarthy]

This is my favorite part:


What is Europe, my deputies? There is no geographical definition of our continent, but only an ethnic-national [volkliche] and cultural one. The frontier of this continent is not the Ural mountains, but rather the line that divides the Western outlook on life from that of the East.

At one time, Europe was confined to the Greek isles, which had been reached by Nordic tribes, and where the flame first burned that slowly but steadily enlightened humanity. And when these Greeks fought against the invasion of the Persian conquerors, they did not just defend their own small homeland, which was Greece, but [also] that concept that is now Europe. And then [the spirit of] Europe shifted from Hellas to Rome. Roman thought and Roman statecraft combined with Greek spirit and Greek culture. An empire was created, the importance and creative power of which has never been matched, much less surpassed, even to this day. And when the Roman legions defended Italy in three terrible wars against the attack of Carthage from Africa, and finally battled to victory, in this case as well Rome fought not just for herself, but [also] for the Greco-Roman world that then encompassed Europe.

The next invasion against the home soil of this new culture of humanity came from the wide expanses of the East. A horrific storm of cultureless hordes from the center of Asia poured deep into the heart of the European continent, burning, ravaging and murdering as a true scourge of God. On the Catalaunian fields , Roman and Germanic men fought together for the first time [in 451] in a decisive battle of tremendous importance for a culture that had begun with the Greeks, passed on to the Romans, and then encompassed the Germanic peoples.

Europe had matured. The Occident arose from Hellas and Rome, and for many centuries its defense was the task not only of the Romans, but above all of the Germanic peoples. What we call Europe is the geographic territory of the Occident, enlightened by Greek culture, inspired by the powerful heritage of the Roman empire, its territory enlarged by Germanic colonization. Whether it was the German emperors fighting back invasions from the East on the Unstrut [river, in 933] or on the Lechfeld [plain, in 955], or others pushing back Africa from Spain over a period of many years, it was always a struggle of a developing Europe against a profoundly alien outside world.

Just as Rome once made her immortal contribution to the building and defense of the continent, so now have the Germanic peoples taken up the defense and protection of a family of nations which, although they may differ and diverge in their political structure and goals, nevertheless together constitute a racially and culturally unified and complementary whole.

And from this Europe there have not only been settlements in other parts of the world, but intellectual-spiritual [geistig] and cultural fertilization as well, a fact that anyone realizes who is willing to acknowledge the truth rather than deny it. Thus, it was not England that cultivated the continent, but rather Anglo-Saxon and Norman branches of the Germanic nation that moved from our continent to the [British] island and made possible her development, which is certainly unique in history. In the same way, it was not America that discovered Europe, but the other way around. And all that which America did not get from Europe may seem worthy of admiration to a Jewified mixed race, but Europe regards that merely as symptomatic of decay in artistic and cultural life, the product of Jewish or Negroid blood mixture.



It's to be noted that Hitler went from praising US racial stock as being superior to Europe's in his Zweites Buch to slamming us for being Jews and niggers.

But then Nazi racial policy always changed depending on political shifts.

[poiuytrewq0987]

The summer of 1941 seemed like the ideal moment to strike. A new Mongol invasion was ready to pour across Europe.

Lame propagandaspeak.



What is Europe, my deputies? There is no geographical definition of our continent, but only an ethnic-national [volkliche] and cultural one. The frontier of this continent is not the Ural mountains, but rather the line that divides the Western outlook on life from that of the East.
OK.


At one time, Europe was confined to the Greek isles, which had been reached by Nordic tribes, and where the flame first burned that slowly but steadily enlightened humanity.lolwut #2


On the Catalaunian fields , Roman and Germanic men fought together for the first time [in 451] in a decisive battle of tremendous importance for a culture that had begun with the Greeks, passed on to the Romans, and then encompassed the Germanic peoples. Oh ho, a blow struck against Nordicists!


Just as Rome once made her immortal contribution to the building and defense of the continent, so now have the Germanic peoples taken up the defense and protection of a family of nations which, although they may differ and diverge in their political structure and goals, nevertheless together constitute a racially and culturally unified and complementary whole.
Am I seeing pan-European sentiments made by Hitler?


If the German Reich, with its soldiers and weapons, had not stood against this opponent, a storm would have burned over Europe that would have eliminated, once and for all time, and in all its intellectual paucity and traditional stupidity, the laughable British idea of the European balance of power.
At last a statement made by Hitler that I agree. The same idea that made Britain support the Ottoman Empire and stopped Russia from fully liberating the Balkans from Ottoman rule.

[Joe McCarthy]

Originally Posted by Libre
Am I seeing pan-European sentiments made by Hitler?


Yes. In my view this speech is the strongest evidence for the claim that Hitler was a pan-European. That doesn't mean he was necessarily, but it's thought provoking.

[Joe McCarthy]

On the other hand, here is what Hitler thought of Coudenhove-Kalergi's Pan-Europa plan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nikolaus_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi


Meanwhile, his Pan-Europeanism earned vivid loathing from Adolf Hitler, who excoriated its pacifism and mechanical economism and belittled its founder as "everybody's bastard".

The mongrel count responded by approaching Mussolini in an attempt to form a union of Latin nations against Germany, which of course failed.

[Innar]

hOY_0gIV7is

StIskkWEyy8

9YzhaNuSqpM

[Joe McCarthy]

The question is whether Hitler regarded the United States as a 'Zionist state' or a KKK state. Check out this anti-American Nazi propaganda poster addressing the Dutch public in 1944:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_v1BmTk256DI/TCUAu5n0GXI/AAAAAAAABZU/69n9aGB4XPg/s1600/428px-Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster%5B1%5D.jpg

Compare it to this anti-American propaganda poster from the virulently anti-racist Soviet Union in 1950:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Poster35.jpg

Seeing the Nazis joining the Communists in essentially blasting us for racism did a lot to remove any illusions I may have still had about National Socialism's sincerity in matters of race.

[Megrez]

The question is whether Hitler regarded the United States as a 'Zionist state' or a KKK state. Check out this anti-American Nazi propaganda poster addressing the Dutch public in 1944:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_v1BmTk256DI/TCUAu5n0GXI/AAAAAAAABZU/69n9aGB4XPg/s1600/428px-Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster%5B1%5D.jpg

Could be either one, and the answer would the same: do not want. :ranger:
Anyway I doubt Hitler personally made that poster, have you seen who the propaganda is aimed at? It's more likely the work of a Dutch ally.


Seeing the Nazis joining the Communists in essentially blasting us for racism did a lot to remove any illusions I may have still had about National Socialism's sincerity in matters of race.
If you also don't have illusions about White America, that's fine.

[Raskolnikov]

They attacked the hypocrisy of speaking against the racism and authoritarianism of NS while having it at home (like any country would), and that their main culture is a mixed-race incorporation with Jews, who used black musicians and athletes and vapid pageants and contests/polls ("world's most valuable leg"), and at best a confused racism and violence which is more about bombs, terrorism, destruction than racial collectivism and protection of European culture. The caption in fact reads: The USA will save European culture from destruction or something like that.

Far before hiphop, Jewish-Americans spread jazz, at least their bad version of it, and, interestingly, the first Hollywood film was a white nationalist (Birth of a Nation) one made by a Jew, whose next movie the first anti-racial one.

[Joe McCarthy]

Originally Posted by Forrester
They attacked the hypocrisy of speaking against the racism and authoritarianism of NS while having it at home (like any country would),

This is of course assuming the US was opposing Nazi Germany as an anti-racist state. It wasn't. FDR even turned away Jewish refugees in enforcing our race based immigration laws. The camps were a rumor, at most, and leading Allied figures didn't even discuss them in their memoirs. The main propaganda was democracy and the rule of law vs. dictatorship and brute force.

People who just assume the Nazis were the big bad racists fighting a bunch of Allied ADL members have bought into the Hollywood version of history. Indeed, prior to the rise of the Third Reich, German racialists looked to the US as a model of racialist and eugenicist thought - and even collectivism, for that matter. I deal with that here:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20894

[poiuytrewq0987]

This is of course assuming the US was opposing Nazi Germany as an anti-racist state. It wasn't. FDR even turned away Jewish refugees in enforcing our race based immigration laws. The camps were a rumor, at most, and leading Allied figures didn't even discuss them in their memoirs. The main propaganda was democracy and the rule of law vs. dictatorship and brute force.

People who just assume the Nazis were the big bad racists fighting a bunch of Allied ADL members have bought into the Hollywood version of history. Indeed, prior to the rise of the Third Reich, German racialists looked to the US as a model of racialist and eugenicist thought - and even collectivism, for that matter. I deal with that here:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20894


Franklin Delano Roosevelt's
Extensive Jewish Family Tree ...



Roosevelts were Jewish Dutch

http://www.jewwatch.com/images/Bush_M13.jpg

http://www.jewwatch.com/gif-roosevelt-family-tree.jpg

"Claes Rosenvelt entered the cloth business in New York, and was married in 1682. He accumulated a fortune. He then changed his name to Nicholas Roosevelt. Of his four sons, Isaac died young. Nicholas married Sarah Solomons. Jacobus married Catherina Hardenburg.

The Roosevelts were not a fighting but a peace-loving people, devoted to trade. Isaac became a capitalist. He founded the Bank of New York in 1790."


The first Roosevelt came to America in 1649. His name was Claes Rosenfelt. He was a Jew. Nicholas, the son of Claes was the ancestor of both Franklin and Theodore. He married a Jewish girl, named Kunst, in 1682. Nicholas had a son named Jacobus Rosenfeld..." (The Corvallis Gazette Times of Corballis, Oregon).


Sarah Delano

"The President's father married Sarah Delano; and it become clear. Schmalix (genealogist) writes: 'In the seventh generation we see the mother of Franklin Delano Roosevelt as being of Jewish descent.

The Delanos are descendants of Italian or Spanish Jewish family; Dilano, Dilan, Dillano. The Jew Delano drafted an agreement with the West Indies Co., in 1657 regarding the colonization of the island of Curacao. About this the directors of the West Indies Co., had correspondence with the Governor of New Holland.

[Joe McCarthy]

http://wais.stanford.edu/Individuals/wasfranklinroosevelt.htm


Assume, for the moment, despite a complete lack of any evidence to support it, that Claes was born Jewish. He was FDR's great-great-great-great-great grandfather (5 greats). That means he provided 1/128 of FDR's DNA - under 1%. But it must have been the Jewish looking DNA.

Then of course, on the other hand, we have the story that Hitler was part Jewish. Though unconfirmed, if true, Hitler would be far more than 1/128.

The Nazis also made certain Jews 'Honorary Aryans', employed Milch, shielded Richard Strauss' Jewish relatives, had Jewish soldiers, and on it goes...

[Cato]

Patton gives the best sort of rebuttal to Nazis, even today:

http://www.turtletrader.com/patton.html

“Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. You won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Men, all this stuff you've heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans, love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball players, the toughest boxers ... Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Now, an army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of crap. The Bilious bastards who wrote that stuff about individuality for the Saturday Evening Post, don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating. Now we have the finest food and equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. You know ... My God, I actually pity those poor bastards we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun bastards by the bushel. Now some of you boys, I know, are wondering whether or not you'll chicken out under fire. Don't worry about it. I can assure you that you'll all do your duty. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them. Spill their blood, shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo, that a moment before was your best friends face, you'll know what to do. Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything, we'll let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly, and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose, and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time, and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose. Now, there's one thing that you men will be able to say when you get back home, and you may thank God for it. Thirty years from now when you're sitting around your fireside with your grandson on your knee, and he asks you, What did you do in the great World War Two? You won't have to say, Well, I shoveled shit in Louisiana. Alright now, you sons of bitches, you know how I feel. I will be proud to lead you wonderful guys into battle anytime, anywhere. That's all."

Hitler's bluster didn't save him from a coward's death in the Fuhrerbunker.

[Joe McCarthy]

Ahh, Patton...

I still recall reading his memoirs. Along with commenting that blacks were too dumb for armored units, he regarded Arabs in Algeria as troublemakers, Sicilians as living in the Middle Ages, and on further occasions trashed Jews.

Such were the 'anti-racist' Allies.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Ahh, Patton...

I still recall reading his memoirs. Along with commenting that blacks were too dumb for armored units, he regarded Arabs in Algeria as troublemakers, Sicilians as living in the Middle Ages, and on further occasions trashed Jews.

Such were the 'anti-racist' Allies.

Patton wanted to go to war with Russia and break communism before it could become too strong and he was assassinated for realizing the Soviet threat.

[Megrez]

^

Funny how the US government treated one of its best men.

[Cato]

^

Funny how the US government treated one of its most honest men.

Fixed.

[Svanhild]

My God, I actually pity those poor bastards we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun bastards by the bushel. Now some of you boys, I know, are wondering whether or not you'll chicken out under fire. Don't worry about it. I can assure you that you'll all do your duty. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them. Spill their blood, shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo, that a moment before was your best friends face, you'll know what to do. Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything, we'll let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly, and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose, and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time, and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose.

How sad that this glorious Patton died in a pathetic car accident. Deserved him right. Darwin award proved, fate has a thing for irony.

http://www.car-accidents.com/2007-crash-pics/patton-car-accident.jpg

He left the scene no day too soon.

[Cato]

How sad that this glorious Patton died in a pathetic car accident. Deserved him right. Darwin award proved, fate has a thing for irony.

http://www.car-accidents.com/2007-crash-pics/patton-car-accident.jpg

He left the scene no day too soon.

:coffee:

Your general dislike of Patton has been noticed before, my dear, but the man was a general leading American soldiers into war against Germans. Do you expect he'd treat the Germans nicely and ask them over for tea and biscuits?

Patton never lost a battle he oversaw; he was in a war, the greatest war in human history and he creamed the enemy (which is what good generals do, hence his motivation to the troops of the 3rd Army to show the Nazis no mercy).

Patton loved his troops, and they loved him, as this from the Sunwu says:


"Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys.

Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death!"

Compare Patton's love of his men to Shitler's contempt for the lives of his soldiers. Dying in an auto wreck, so? His legacy as one of the greatest American generals in history speaks for itself; he pulverized his enemies which, again, is what good generals do. He was respected by some of the best names in the Wehrmacht.

"The Germans respected Patton’s strategy and admired its genius, calling him our “most modern” commander. Rommel wrote that, “We had to wait until the Patton Army in France to see the most astonishing achievements in mobile warfare.” Von Rundstedt simply called Patton our “best.”"

http://pattonuncovered.org/index.php/american-blitzkrieg

[Svanhild]

Your general dislike of Patton has been noticed before, my dear, but the man was a general leading American soldiers into war against Germans. Do you expect he'd treat the Germans nicely and ask them over for tea and biscuits?
Someone who talks about Germans like him, proven by your pasted quotes, deserves no respect and receives no respect from my side. He doesn't talk about Nazi leadership. He talks about Germans as people. Your leading American general wasn't particularly competent. Leading an umpteen times stronger army by quantity against a smaller enemy stuck in a two-front war against half the world is not remarkable. Even a gifted shoe blacker could have led the US army to victory. The true heroes are the German generals who could fight back numerically superior armies rather often during the war, being in an outnumbered situation and entirely cut off from supplies, turning the tide more than once.


Compare Patton's love of his men to Shitler's contempt for the lives of his soldiers. Dying in an auto wreck, so? His legacy as one of the greatest American generals in history speaks for itself; he pulverized his enemies which, again, is what good generals do.
Is there a switch to shut off your Hollywood propaganda record? His legacy is that he led black, mixed and jewish soldiers to victory over self-determined Europeans and that he made fun about humiliated German civilians and raped German women. If there was a monument of Patton in Germany, I'd spray it with derogative terms and ask some male comrades to pee at it, uploading the photos on the internet and rubbing them in your face. If you get my message.

[Cato]

He talks about Germans as people.

The American POWs gunned down at Malmady were people too.

:coffee:

[Eldritch]

Let's not lose sight of this forum's purpose, people. That the OP's never gotten close enough to see it in the first place is no excuse to go down the same path.

[Liffrea]

Hitler’s reasoning aside it was still a bloody stupid strategic move, Germany was already guaranteed by the end of 1941 to have to look for (at best) a negotiated settlement on 1939 borders with a USSR they had seriously underestimated, deciding to declare war against the world’s foremost economic power that could pump out more guns, tanks and planes than there were Germans wasn’t wise.

From what I have read Roosevelt had no chance what so ever of making Congress declare war on Germany (though Roosevelt wanted it) not whilst the US was engaged in the Pacific, Roosevelt must have kept reading the German declaration, couldn’t believe his luck.

[Äike]

Hitler’s reasoning aside it was still a bloody stupid strategic move, Germany was already guaranteed by the end of 1941 to have to look for (at best) a negotiated settlement on 1939 borders with a USSR they had seriously underestimated, deciding to declare war against the world’s foremost economic power that could pump out more guns, tanks and planes than there were Germans wasn’t wise.

Not deciding to declare war against the USSR in 1941, would have meant that the Russians would be in Berlin, raping German women, already in 1942.

[Groenewolf]

From what I have read Roosevelt had no chance what so ever of making Congress declare war on Germany (though Roosevelt wanted it) not whilst the US was engaged in the Pacific, Roosevelt must have kept reading the German declaration, couldn’t believe his luck.

Problem of course was that Hitler at some point had to do something about the not so over support Roosevelt was giving to both the UK and the USSR. And I have also read (http://www.amazon.com/Tragic-Deception-Americas-Involvement-World/dp/0815969171/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1292344675&sr=1-1) that Roosevelt tried to provoke the Kriegsmarine in to firing at American ships in order to get congress behind his plans.

But for those who consider that US involvement was a good things, must agree that Roosevelt was not the man to lead America in that war considering how many of his cabinet where later revealed to have at least communist sympathies.

[Groenewolf]

Not deciding to declare war against the USSR in 1941, would have meant that the Russians would be in Berlin, raping German women, already in 1942.

Yep, that was an who attacks who first scenario. Something hardly mentioned, because Stalin must appear as one of the good guys.:rolleyes:

[Liffrea]

Thus, it was not England that cultivated the continent, but rather Anglo-Saxon and Norman branches of the Germanic nation that moved from our continent to the [British] island and made possible her development

Leaving aside the fact that the Normans were predominantly Gallo-Romans with a thin veneer of Franks, Saxons and then Dano-Norse on top, who spoke an idiosyncratic version of Old French with a higher quantity of Old Norse words and who were “French” (as far as that word has meaning for the time) culturally.

The Anglo-Saxons, genetically, were probably mostly descended from British-Celts not Germanic settlers, though the debate is still open.

There was no “Germanic” nation with some monolithic ideology and goal. There were a myriad squabbling tribal groups with a broadly similar cultural and linguistic background that ran into Celtic, Slavic and Iranic groups on the fringes, how “Germanic” the Goths were when they crossed the Danube into the Roman Empire is an interesting question.

Finally, finally, most would argue (probably correctly) that it was the bastardised Normans who began the process of turning England (and later Britain) into a world power. As much as I admire the Anglo-Saxons it is difficult to see the political dynamism and ruthlessness in them that the Normans had in spades.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Karl
Not deciding to declare war against the USSR in 1941, would have meant that the Russians would be in Berlin, raping German women, already in 1942.

There is documented reliable evidence that the USSR was planning to attack Germany?


Originally Posted by Groenewolf
Problem of course was that Hitler at some point had to do something about the not so over support Roosevelt was giving to both the UK and the USSR. And I have also read that Roosevelt tried to provoke the Kriegsmarine in to firing at American ships in order to get congress behind his plans.

Granted that America was hardly neutral, it still doesn’t alter the point, though surely. Why fight a war you cannot possibly win? Germany would have been lucky to extricate itself from the unfolding disaster in Russia with something to show other than a red flag on the Reichstag why make matters worse?


But for those who consider that US involvement was a good things, must agree that Roosevelt was not the man to lead America in that war considering how many of his cabinet where later revealed to have at least communist sympathies.

Well he wouldn’t have been if Hitler hadn’t declared war, I’m reasonably convinced Roosevelt would not have been able to persuade Congress to go to war in Europe. Indeed the average American from what I understand wasn’t in the least interested in Europe. Didn’t Roosevelt campaign on promises to the Americans to keep the US out of Europe’s problems?

[Äike]

There is documented reliable evidence that the USSR was planning to attack Germany?

Yes, it is mentioned in most history books that I have read about WW2. There's nothing worse than a war on 2 fronts, Germany didn't attack the USSR voluntarily. They had no other option.

[Groenewolf]

Yes, it is mentioned in most history books that I have read about WW2. There's nothing worse than a war on 2 fronts, Germany didn't attack the USSR voluntarily. They had no other option.

Indeed, there is even at least one Russian historian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Bunich) who states the same. The reason why such things are hardly mentioned in the countries of the former West-bloc is because there as an interest to portray Stalin as one of the good guys in WOII. And many things about the real Stalin does not really fit well with the image they wanted to create.

[Joe McCarthy]

Patton wanted to go to war with Russia and break communism before it could become too strong

Sounds great in principle, but given the size and strength of the American and Soviet armies, Europe might have become a Mad Max movie by the time it was over.


and he was assassinated for realizing the Soviet threat.


That's merely a conspiracy theory, and I say all of this despite having grave reservations regarding the policy toward Communism of the Roosevelt and Truman governments.

[Joe McCarthy]

^

Funny how the US government treated one of its best men.

All they really did was kick him upstairs because he opposed the harsher forms of de-Nazification policy.

[Joe McCarthy]

Let's not lose sight of this forum's purpose, people. That the OP's never gotten close enough to see it in the first place is no excuse to go down the same path.

If 'pan-Europeanism' is properly defined as 'Blame America', you're correct, I have absolutely no interest in pan-Europeanism.

[Eldritch]

If 'pan-Europeanism' is properly defined as 'Blame America', you're correct, I have absolutely no interest in pan-Europeanism.

What are you doing on this forum then?

[Joe McCarthy]

But for those who consider that US involvement was a good things, must agree that Roosevelt was not the man to lead America in that war considering how many of his cabinet where later revealed to have at least communist sympathies.

That rings hollow given the fact that Hitler broke bread with the Bolshevik scum first.

[Joe McCarthy]

What are you doing on this forum then?

I don't define pan-Europeanism as scapegoating the US. That I resist such scapegoating apparently pisses you off, but then that's your problem, not mine.

[Eldritch]

I don't define pan-Europeanism as scapegoating the US. That I resist such scapegoating apparently pisses you off, but then that's your problem, not mine.

That was precisely what I meant when I said you don't understand what this forum is about. You're the only American member here who bitches constantly about anti-Americanism.

[Groenewolf]

That rings hollow given the fact that Hitler broke bread with the Bolshevik scum first.

Point taken. Hitler did made some strategic agreements with Stalin, however I doubt that either of them thought it would last for long. What I am talking about are members of the Roosevelt cabinet that where later revealed to be in the back pocket of Stalin by among organizations the FBI.

P.S. considering WOII my harshest criticism is for our own government for their unrealistic preparations for war.

[Joe McCarthy]

Point taken. Hitler did made some strategic agreements with Stalin, however I doubt that either of them thought it would last for long. What I am talking about are members of the Roosevelt cabinet that where later revealed to be in the back pocket of Stalin by among organizations the FBI.


I'm certainly no fan of FDR and his view toward Communism, and it's true that the USSR penetrated our government. In general my attitude toward WW2 is - I wish it never happened. 'Winning' the war, I suppose, was the least bad option, but the war itself was used against us by subversives domestically. Blacks used it to make Civil Rights inroads, and the argument was made that 'We defeated fascism abroad. Now we must defeat it at home' in overthrowing our racial system.


P.S. considering WOII my harshest criticism is for our own government for their unrealistic preparations for war.

I agree, but the Netherlands was in an impossible situation. As it turned out it would have been better to join the Allies. Hitler's invasion was sheer aggression, unlike the Norway invasion.

[Joe McCarthy]

How sad that this glorious Patton died in a pathetic car accident. Deserved him right. Darwin award proved, fate has a thing for irony.

http://www.car-accidents.com/2007-crash-pics/patton-car-accident.jpg

He left the scene no day too soon.

Had Patton had his way Germany would have gotten softer treatment post-war. That he died actually hurt Germany. In attacking him, you're ironically sort of attacking yourself. :)

[Groenewolf]

I agree, but the Netherlands was in an impossible situation. As it turned out it would have been better to join the Allies.

In practice we where on the side of the Allies ;) .

[Joe McCarthy]

The American POWs gunned down at Malmady were people too.

:coffee:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy


In an incident for which he would be widely criticized, McCarthy lobbied for the commutation of death sentences given to a group of Waffen-SS soldiers convicted of war crimes for carrying out the 1944 Malmedy massacre of American prisoners of war. McCarthy was critical of the convictions because of allegations of torture during the interrogations that led to the German soldiers' confessions. He charged that the U.S. Army was engaged in a coverup of judicial misconduct, but never presented any evidence to support the accusation.[21] Shortly after this, a poll of the Senate press corps voted McCarthy "the worst U.S. senator" currently in office.

[Joe McCarthy]

In practice we where on the side of the Allies ;) .

Yes, though the Netherlands refused repeated Allied requests to join as a co-belligerent. They bent over backward to stay out.

[Groenewolf]

Yes, though the Netherlands refused repeated Allied requests to join as a co-belligerent. They bent over backward to stay out.

The official stance was indeed that of neutrality. However in secret most of the preparations where for a German attack, also our intelligence agency cooperated with the British one. Alto the government ignored the recommendations of the military supreme commander on how to prepare. The bitter irony is that he had been proven correct on all points. Except for maybe the paratrooper assault on Den Haag, but that was only because that was something radically new.

If you can read Dutch you might find this (http://www.bol.com/nl/p/nederlandse-boeken/generaal-reynders/1001004005498782/index.html) interesting.

[Liffrea]

O
riginally Posted by Karl
Yes, it is mentioned in most history books that I have read about WW2.

Interesting, whilst I don’t claim to be widely read on the subject the one’s I have read (the last being Russia’s War by Richard Overy) generally paint a picture of a Stalin whilst publicly virulently anti-fascist in private played a game of trying to suck up to Germany realising that they were far more powerful militarily than the Anglo-French alliance. It happens that we are none to sure what was going through Stalin’s mind, many historians have claimed he was incompetent in his stance towards the Germans refusing to recognise threats posed by Germany to the USSR and not making adequate preparations.


There's nothing worse than a war on 2 fronts, Germany didn't attack the USSR voluntarily. They had no other option.

Well that doesn’t match at all what we read in Mein Kampf and Hitler’s table talk or what we know in general about the war. I doubt anyone can seriously argue Hitler didn’t intend to invade the USSR, his entire foreign policy was structured around carving a German colonial empire in western Russia! It is certainly true he didn’t want to fight the Western powers (he didn’t want war with Britain at all but he did want to neutralise France in the future), yet he was willing to risk Anglo-French military intervention when he invaded Poland in 1939.